Bob Barr: Edwards Prosecution Reflects Gross Overreaching By Feds

The definition of “overreaching” in the next edition of the Merriam-Webster Dictionary could be a single sentence — “Over•reaching: see June 3, 2011 indictment of former presidential candidate and United States Senator John Edwards for alleged campaign finance violations.”

Every current and future candidate for federal office ought to file an amicus brief in behalf of Edwards. If the federal government succeeds in securing a conviction of Edwards in this case, the precedent will have been set for future administrations to employ federal campaign finance laws to reach and criminalize virtually any monies used by a candidate’s supporter(s) that even indirectly have the effect of protecting the “image” of the candidate.

When I first read the headline I was aghast but after reading the entire article I see Barrs’ point. Sometimes the emotion of an unsavory situation (and I really think Edwards is a total creep) can make one shut down to logic.

I’m especially pleased with this because Edwards is a Democrat. I wonder if Wayne Root would have written his article about Mr. Weiner if he was a Republican? People on the right can be such hypocrites some times.

Edwards is a criminal many times over. He (like his fellow crooks Elliot Spitzer, Rudy Guiliani and countless other grandstanding politicians) made his illicit fortune using the power of government to extort money from other individuals. He does not deserve any protection from anyone.

Indeed, my question for Barr might be this: is it just because Edwards was a fellow member of the “politician private club”, that Barr felt it necessary to defend him? After all, if Barr is concerned about the rights we are losing daily, then there are much more compelling “victims of the state” to highlight and defend.

Marc said “…there are much more compelling “victims of the state” to highlight and defend.”

I guess it depends on your definition of compelling. In Barr’s case, trying to come up with a blog entry appropriate for a newspaper, I’d say a high profile politician such as Edwards is about as compelling a victim as there is.

I agree with Barr here (first time in a while), but I certainly don’t have any sympathy for Edwards. I think it is safe to say that he is total scum. In fact, with a bit more luck, he could have been in the white house trying to bend me over against my will right now. Still, I don’t want to see him convicted on these trumped up charges. Actually, I prefer elimination of all campaign finance laws.

I remember the story in ’08 on Barr skimming old lady conservatives (&men) from his conservative PAC . Had his son setup to take a large salary or some such! (anyone else know what I’m talking about?)

He certainly doesn’t want the fed looking closely at FRAUD in the use of “donated” money !

Barr’s support of U.S. interdiction into central America against drug growers, his former C.I.A. ties, and this clear FRAUD (to me) caused me to support Baldwin in ’08 as a protest.

Funny to me how Root’s articles get over 100 comments and Barr gets few. Now what if the word was that Bob Barr is considering another go for the LP nomination? The interest would pickup no doubt…

Claiming that providing for the common Defense conflicts with the Constitution is nothing more than a lie told by tyrants to make us agree to the absolute despotism of a tyrannical government. Claiming that some Citizens MUST give up their eared wealth for the common good of other Citizens is another lie told by tyrants to make us consent to involuntary servitude. Fellow Citizens, it is well past time that we threw off these nefarious designs, tyrannies and usurpations of OUR POWER and elected a President who is actually prepared to conduct his/her office so as to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” as well as the Lives, Liberty and Property of We the People.